# Quick question for Christians **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 31, 2009, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472 "2009-03-31T18:11:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/61 "2009-04-03T15:21:25Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > You’re still moving the definition of Heaven from “place where you _willingly_ praise God eternally” to “place where you _are required to_ praise God eternally”. Big difference. Does God demand our praise, or merely our faith/obedience? Demanding “faith” makes no moral or logical sense. There’s nothing particularly noble about demanding obedience either, but at least that would be logically comprehensible if he was ever willing to clearly state what his orders are. How can you obey someone who won’t tell you what he wants you to do? Why does an omimax god need obedience anyway? > [@](#): > > And any Christian who thinks that God gives His people an easy ride _really_ hasn’t read the Bible. God plays the Long Game - in the end it’s all good, even if in the short term (by God’s timeframe, anyway) it’s really quite horrible. An omnimax god doesn’t need to play a long game. Any goal which accomplished by short term “horrible-ness” can be effortlessly and instantly accomplished _without_ any horribleness. There is no excuse for childhood leukemia, or harlequin babies or serial killers or holocausts. Calling evil and suffering a means to God’s end ignores the fact that God doesn’t _need_ any means to achieve an end. All he has to do is will it. If there is an omnimax God, then all evil is God’s will and all of it is unnecessary. ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/62 "2009-04-03T16:06:41Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > I agree with **Czarcasm**. I would never worship anyone who could have prevented 9/11 and didn’t. That god is evil and/or not able to do everything. But why do you draw the line at 9/11? Do you extend this to any murder or humans harming one another? Besides, we have to capacity to end childhood hunger and work toward ending childhood disease. Resources go elsewhere, as a human choice. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/63 "2009-04-03T16:35:50Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > If he isn’t willing to demonstrate his own existence, he has no right to demand belief in it. If there were clear evidence for the existence of God, it would be as pointless to believe in him as it is to believe that the sky is blue. The point of faith is believing in something for which there is no evidence. > [@](#): > > You can also count me as another one who doesn’t get God’s alleged craving for praise and glory. Praising God is for the benefit of the praiser, not God. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Why does an omimax god need obedience anyway? Similarly, obedience is for the benefit of the obeyer, not God. > [@](#): > > There is no excuse for childhood leukemia, or harlequin babies or serial killers or holocausts. That is arguing from ignorance–just because you cannot imagine an excuse does not mean there is not one. > [@hotflungwok](#): > > See, what I’ve always heard is that the repentance is just part of it, that accepting god/jesus is the second necessary part. You can’t just be sorry, you have to be sorry to the right supernatural being. That’s something added by denominations that believe in Christian exclusivity. Most Christians do not believe that. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/64 "2009-04-03T16:39:56Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > It’s probably some sort of quantum electrodynamic afterlife. You do all those things, but only settle on one when observed. Ahah! That’s it! If we are good, we become Schrodinger’s cat 😃 ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/65 "2009-04-03T16:44:34Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > Ahah! That’s it! If we are good, we become Schrodinger’s cat 😃 Hopefully traveling down the pantleg of time where we’re alive… ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/66 "2009-04-03T17:09:37Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > If there were clear evidence for the existence of God, it would be as pointless to believe in him as it is to believe that the sky is blue. The point of faith is believing in something for which there is no evidence. This makes no sense whatsoever. What’s the virtue of believing in something with no evidence? Why should I? Why should anyone get a cookie for believing something they ave no good reason to believe? Why should anyone be _denied_ a cookie for _not_ believing something they have no good reason to believe? I can’t see any moral justification for making salvation contingent on a random guess as to which one of an infinite number of possible gods, ultimate truths or answers – all with exactly the same amount of evidence – is the “right” one. This is no different from God saying, “it makes no difference what kind of person you are. In order to get to Heaven,you have to guess what number I’m thinking of between zero and infinity. You get no hints. Go.” > [@](#): > > Praising God is for the benefit of the praiser, not God.Similarly, obedience is for the benefit of the obeyer, not God. How so? What if I feel just fine without either praising or obeying God. Why does God care? > [@](#): > > That is arguing from ignorance–just because you cannot imagine an excuse does not mean there is not one. It’s not a question of imagination. I’m arguing syllogistically from predicates, not from ignorance. It is logically impossible for an omnimax God to allow suffering. To say that there’s a necessity for evil or suffering is to say that God is not omnipotent. To say that God chooses to allow it even though he doesn’t have to is to say he’s not omnibenevolent. Anything God can accomplish by allowing suffering, he can accomplish instantly and effortlessly _without_ allowing suffering. If God is all-powerful, all suffering is unnecessary. If God is all-good, he logically _can’t_ allow unnecessary suffering (as soon as he does, he stops being all-good). The existence of suffering demonstrates _syllogistically_ that God is eithernot omnipotent, not omnibenevolent, or – one more possibility – not omniscient. Of course, it can also mean he simply doesn’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8491ac/32.png) [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fake_Tales_of_San_Francisco)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/67 "2009-04-03T17:25:58Z")
Nobody judges a god. Whatever a god does, is whatever such a being decides it is. If not intervening with a creation to see what happens when you give them freewill is evil, who says it is evil? God says it is good, so it must be, since he defines those terms. Such a being could arbitrarily define different good/evil terms for his/her creation if they wanted. They do not need to be subject of their own rules. Omnipotence does not demand action. Richard Wurmbrand, a Christian who had been kept in solitary confinement by the Soviets said it best. “No law is just, even if it is divine, because all laws fix equal standards on men of unequal abilities in unequal situations.” There’s no evidence for god though, so it’s all a bit futile. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/68 "2009-04-03T17:27:02Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > This makes no sense whatsoever. What’s the virtue of believing in something with no evidence? Why should I? Why should anyone get a cookie for believing something they ave no good reason to believe? Why should anyone be _denied_ a cookie for _not_ believing something they have no good reason to believe? You’ll have to ask those who believe that faith is important. I fall on the “works” side of Christian theology. I’m simply saying that faith can’t have evidence by definition, so it’s unfair to make that complaint about it. > [@](#): > > How so? What if I feel just fine without either praising or obeying God. Why does God care? That’s your choice. Advice is given, you can use it or ignore it. > [@](#): > > The existence of suffering demonstrates _syllogistically_ that God is eithernot omnipotent, not omnibenevolent, or – one more possibility – not omniscient. > Of course, it can also mean he simply doesn’t exist. And one more possibility: logic does not apply to God. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/69 "2009-04-03T17:36:35Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > You’ll have to ask those who believe that faith is important. I fall on the “works” side of Christian theology. Same here. A “profession of faith”, without any works or actions, is just empty lip service and means nothing. I suppose that could be from my Catholic upbringing. ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/70 "2009-04-03T17:51:16Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > You’ll have to ask those who believe that faith is important. I fall on the “works” side of Christian theology. Are ‘acts’ more important than faith? What if I have the correct acts, but no faith? Is that just as good, or would I get less heaven than someone who had both? If not, why bother with the faith when the acts are all that matter? > [@](#): > > I’m simply saying that faith can’t have evidence by definition, so it’s unfair to make that complaint about it. No it isn’t. Belief without evidence is also by definition irrational. Why is such a thing held as anything but bad? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/71 "2009-04-03T17:59:05Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > You’ll have to ask those who believe that faith is important. I fall on the “works” side of Christian theology. I’m simply saying that faith can’t have evidence by definition, so it’s unfair to make that complaint about it. I’m not complaining about the definition. I’m asking why it has any moral virtue – or, perhaps more importantly – why the _lack_ of faith deserves penalty. > [@](#): > > That’s your choice. Advice is given, you can use it or ignore it. Can I ignore it without penalty? Who’s _giving_ this advice, by the way? > [@](#): > > And one more possibility: logic does not apply to God. This is not a possibility. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/72 "2009-04-03T18:18:08Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > Are ‘acts’ more important than faith? What if I have the correct acts, but no faith? Is that just as good, or would I get less heaven than someone who had both? If not, why bother with the faith when the acts are all that matter? Again, ask someone who values faith. I am a Christian who values works. As told by the Good Samaritan story–it was the one who did good work that is saved, not the one who was a member of the correct religion. > [@](#): > > No it isn’t. Belief without evidence is also by definition irrational. Why is such a thing held as anything but bad? Why should irrationality be bad? If I prefer green M&Ms to red, am I bad for being irrational? > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I’m not complaining about the definition. I’m asking why it has any moral virtue – or, perhaps more importantly – why the _lack_ of faith deserves penalty. > Can I ignore it without penalty? Who’s _giving_ this advice, by the way? I don’t believe there is a penalty. God is giving the advice. > [@](#): > > This is not a possibility. Why is it not a possibility? ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/73 "2009-04-03T18:48:48Z")
> [@gigi](#): > > Besides, we have to capacity to end childhood hunger and work toward ending childhood disease. Resources go elsewhere, as a human choice. We don’t really have that capacity. There’s too much infighting, corruption, historical emnity, greed, selfishnes, and so on. If I have a sandwich and there is a starving person next to me, I have the capacity to give that person the sandwich. I would think that humanity as a whole is against childhood hunger, or at least indifferent to it. However, since humanity as a whole has an excess of sandwiches and yet childhood hunger persists, I can only surmise that we don’t have the capacity to end it. Now, if I were a religious person, I may wonder why we were created without that capacity, and who to blame for that creative lapse. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/74 "2009-04-03T18:53:37Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > Why is it not a possibility? Because logic does not permit it. It’s not something God can magic his way out of. Either the premises or true or they aren’t. If they’re true, then the necessary inferences are true. There’s nothing God can do about it. Saying logic doesn’t apply to God is like saying arithmetic doesn’t apply to God. It’s a senseless statement. ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/75 "2009-04-03T18:56:26Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > We don’t really have that capacity. There’s too much infighting, corruption, historical emnity, greed, selfishnes, and so on. That might mean we have the capacity but allow it to be overshadowed by other things. Perhaps we were created with the capacity, but other faults exist as well. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/76 "2009-04-03T19:18:48Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Because logic does not permit it. It’s not something God can magic his way out of. Either the premises or true or they aren’t. If they’re true, then the necessary inferences are true. There’s nothing God can do about it. Saying logic doesn’t apply to God is like saying arithmetic doesn’t apply to God. It’s a senseless statement. Who made logic King of the World? 🙂 You assert that a particular statement must be true or not. Why should that be accepted? Even in science there are statements that are not subject to binary logic. (Both “the electron is spin up” and “the electron is not spin up” may be false.) God is an entity for which there is no evidence. Yet you are now asserting that God has a particular property: that he is subject to logic. So do you have evidence for this assertion, or do you deny that there is evidence about God? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/77 "2009-04-03T19:30:22Z")
No, I am observing that IF X is true then Y must be true. That’s how logic works. It’s not subject to magical resistance. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/78 "2009-04-03T19:42:18Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > Are ‘acts’ more important than faith? What if I have the correct acts, but no faith? Is that just as good, or would I get less heaven than someone who had both? If not, why bother with the faith when the acts are all that matter? Well that’s the point I was making earlier. It appears to be faith, not acts. If I am a well-behaved atheist, but die saying “You know, there’s no evidence for God”, then Christians say all sorts of things could happen to me (including burning in Hell forever :smack:). However every Christain I’ve met (possibly except Pleonast?) states that a genocidal maniac who sincerely repents on his deathbed will go straight to Heaven. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/79 "2009-04-03T19:43:37Z")
> [@glee](#): > > If I am a well-behaved atheist, but die saying “You know, there’s no evidence for God”, then Christians say all sorts of things could happen to me (including burning in Hell forever :smack:). > > However every Christain I’ve met (possibly except Pleonast?) states that a genocidal maniac who sincerely repents on his deathbed will go straight to Heaven. Forget about you! GANDHI is in Hell, according to them! ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472/80 "2009-04-03T19:47:26Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > Again, ask someone who values faith. I am a Christian who values works. As told by the Good Samaritan story–it was the one who did good work that is saved, not the one who was a member of the correct religion. Then why bother with the religion part of it? Just do the good works and sleep in on Sunday. > [@](#): > > Why should irrationality be bad? :rolleyes: I can think of many instances of irrationality being bad. Can you show why your irrationality is not? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/quick-question-for-christians/491472.md?page=5)